Skip to main content

About your Search

20121006
20121014
Search Results 0 to 9 of about 10 (some duplicates have been removed)
and implicit in is what the u.n. ambassador susan rice said on television in that five days later actually about it being a spontaneous demonstration responding to the video, a copycat demonstration of what had happened earlier in cairo was not correct, and then they in turn from the u.n. mission keep saying there was an intelligence memo and everyone is standing in a circle pointing the finger elsewhere. >> it has the same sort of ethos of what happened after 9/11. when you go back and look -- the original 9/11, a lot of data points that might have been able to point to a danger here, point to some issues related to security. we see this now because this was a country that had been involved in historic revolution, had been a hot spot and we're being told that ambassador stevens had wanted greater security. some discussion about when the duty date for some of the members of that security team had expired that he had requested more, that was not done. some of the issues about resources, about judgments made at the time. now that something this awful has occurred, it puts a different light o
that wasn't true. they perpetuated that lie in the u.n. when our u.n. ambassador said it was because of a youtube video, she knew better, and the president certainly did. the truth does come out. the cover-up is sometimes worse than the crime, but not in this instance when an ambassador is dead and three other americans as well. megyn: hindsight is 2020. he looked back with our ambassador dead and three others dead, we can see that security was not adequate in benghazi. but it is disturbing to hear about this according to colonel wood, that not only are we going to reduce what we have in place. >> you know, there are a couple of observations that i have to make. just three weeks ago, this happened. certainly, this serviceman has the right to speak out about what he knows. but it passes as strange to me that right now, efforts being made to buy these folks and bring them to justice, it may be disinformation. i know that brad will find this shocking, this information may assist in the effort. we do not know. wait a second, brad, to rush to judgment on this, simply because it is four we
including u.s. ambassador to the u.n., did interview after interview connecting the attack to anger over a movie. bill: want to start with peter doocy live in washington. the why is the state department now saying the attack not spontaneous? >> reporter: because lethality and number of armed attackers is unprecedented in recent diplomatic history. plus there was no protest in front of consulate on the night of the attack. the people inside the compound heard explosions before 9:00 p.m. >> we have no information to suggest that it was a plea planned attack. -- preplanned attack. it is not reaction to the 9/11 anniversary that we know of. >> in fact this was not a preplanned, premeditated attack. >> reporter: we know the administration did internally classify as a terrorist attack within 24 hours. we expect to hear a lot more three hours from now in a house oversight committee hearing just across the street that is being billed simply as the security failures of benghazi. bill. bill: i'm looking at four witnesses. any heads up what they will say, peter? >> we heard a little bit from two of
them, and i think there were a couple of very important moments. that came essentially from the u.n. ambassador, susan rice, and in the testimony by ambassador patrick kennedy, which we expect to hear, he says that any official who was in -- was testifying at that particular time that she did, which was on the 16th five days later, the 16th of september, five days after the attack, would have said the very same thing. it was based on the information that was known at that particular moment. you are already setting up, you know, some would say that the administration lied. in fact, chairman isa said that the administration misled people. now, patrick kennedy from the stat department, he is the under secretary for management, and he is saying no, that is what we knew at that particular point. there are some other interesting moments, fred, as we go through this. we can discuss it if you want, but i think that's one of the key things. >> it is, indeed. so we also just learned information that the white house has sent john brennan to libya. he has been meeting with senior libyan officia
. there is no question as senor corker said, at least by the momp ambassador,oric me ambassador to the u.n. everyone ew it wasn't true. that becomes the real question of why in the wld would an ambassador make a statement that was n supported en a few hos after thett rt spo fiayfter the attack. bill: you have three principle players here, you have susan rice, hillary clinton and the president, right? are you suggesting that any of these individuals, or all of them, lied about this? wl, ct w gng go f ssori rice' false statement. you have to understand something. the ason i called my committee back during the time when most members are home campaigning is because i thought it was so ri, usire that weet the refmbassies and consulates around the world and if this has been repeated even once, and i don't act quickly, then i failed to meet my obligation. if they need more resources, i need to make sure they ask for themnd tm. a ptefalngs told, effectively, don't even ask for more resources because we won't support that. you'll see that today in the hearingment. bill: if you believe you were misled and there
on in egypt, which was a protest. so that information took a couple days to clear. >> no, the u.n. secretary, ambassador rice, also talked about -- >> susan rice has a vulnerability here because she was doing that a couple of days into this and, you know, they've cited a cia analysis report which, you know, actually says there was a protest. a lot of people got the information wrong. part of the problem is at the root of your question, which is this needs to be an investigation into the facts and what it's come to is a debate on politics in a presidential election. >> john miller, thanks, john. >>> new poll numbers show just how much the presidential race has turned around in the past week. the latest gallup tracking poll shows 49% of likely voters favor mitt romney and 47% support president obama and two other polls from the key state of ohio shows the candidates are effectively tied. one of them shows romney ahead by one point and the other the president leads by 4. both men campaigned in ohio tuesday. jan crawford is covering the romney campaign in akron. good morning, jan. >> reporter: w
Search Results 0 to 9 of about 10 (some duplicates have been removed)